What does it mean that “they shall all know me”?

Explanation:

The author of Hebrews reminds us that before the coming of Christ, God revealed himself at various times and in various ways.⁵ For one, God revealed himself through miracles, including the plagues of Egypt and the parting of the Red Sea (Exodus 14:21–22). He also led the Israelites by a pillar of fire (Exodus 13:21) and fed them manna from heaven (Exodus 16:4). These were external means for the Israelites to grasp the power, provision, and majesty of God, who sought to establish a relationship with them. Further, God revealed ceremonial and moral laws to Moses, which were enacted through the building of the tabernacle and temple, the establishment of the priesthood and sacrificial system, the keeping of annual festivals, as well as the written record of the law which were meant to be studied and taught (Exodus 20:1 – 40:38). And if these external communicative methods were not enough, God also sent prophets with specific messages, which were often fulfilled in short order. In the end, the author of Hebrews quotes Jeremiah 31:31–34 to indicate that the old covenant was unable to encourage a relationship between God and Israel. And what reason does Jeremiah give for this failure? Even with all of the external communicative methods, the Israelites did not continue in God’s covenant (Hebrews 8:9).

Now, through the ministry of Jesus Christ, God establishes a new, better covenant (Hebrews 8:6). This covenant is better because God will put his laws on people’s minds and hearts (Hebrews 8:10).⁶ Putting his laws on people’s hearts and minds is a more comprehensive and robust method for encouraging a relationship between God and his people. The core of a human being is his mind and soul, the contents of which are known only to that person and God (1 Kings 8:29). External reminders such as sacrifices, ceremonies, and written laws can influence the heart and mind, but internal powers always take precedence. By putting his laws on people’s hearts and minds, God offers people a more effective and intimate means of encouraging a relationship with him.

Counterargument:

There seems to be a conflict between the notion that all will know God and the fact that God establishes teachers in the church. For example, we read in Ephesians 4:1–32 that when Christ ascended, he gave spiritual gifts so that some would be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers (Ephesians 4:11). And the purpose of these offices is to build people up in the unity of the faith so that all would reach a full knowledge of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 4:13). Paul writes something similar to the church in Corinth when he states, God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers (1 Corinthians 12:28). Why would Paul explain that God would send teachers into the church if no one would need to teach others about God, because all would know him, according to Hebrews 8:10–11?

Response to counterargument:

Sometimes there is a tension in Scripture that can be difficult to resolve, and it is important to let Scripture speak for itself when apparent conflicts arise. Other New Testament writers, such as Paul, are clear on the importance of teachers and learning in the church. In fact, the author of Hebrews also emphasizes this point when he exhorts his audience to move beyond the basic doctrines of Christianity to go on to maturity (Hebrews 5:11 – 6:1).⁷ Still, by quoting from Jeremiah 31:1–40 the author makes clear that Jesus Christ establishes a new, superior covenant, in part because God will put his law on people’s hearts and minds.

Does the author of Hebrews suggest that because God’s people will know him, they will not require teachers to help them grow in the knowledge of Jesus Christ? Not at all. Rather, the innate knowledge of God in the new covenant seems to extend to knowledge that God exists (Hebrews 8:11), and an intuitive sense of morality as their consciences relate to God’s laws (Hebrews 8:10).⁸ Still, these are just the beginnings of a relationship with God, which is further enhanced and informed through the church, which includes learning from people who have a mature relationship with God.

Explanation:

Before the Israelites entered the Promised Land, Moses reiterated God’s laws to them. After he did so, he instructed the Israelites to teach their children the commands of God, to discuss them continually, and to write them in various places (Deuteronomy 6:7–9). If the Israelites kept God’s law, they would be blessed (Deuteronomy 28:1–14), but if they failed to keep the law, they would be cursed (Deuteronomy 28:15–68). Of course, Israel failed to keep God’s law, and their own recorded history, including the writings of the prophets, attested to this fact.

Now, as the author of Hebrews explains that Jesus’ ministry established a superior covenant, he quotes Jeremiah 31:31–34, which expands the old covenant stipulations. In the first covenant, the Israelites were supposed to teach each other about God, but with Jesus as high priest, they no longer need to teach their neighbour about God, because they will all know him. The Israelite audience, which would have been well acquainted with (Deuteronomy 6:7–9), would have understood the significant difference between teaching each other about God and having direct personal knowledge of God. In other words, Jesus’ ministry is superior because God’s people will possess innate knowledge of God.

Counterargument:

It is hard to see how the stipulations of the new covenant are superior to the old in the sense that in the new covenant, the people will supposedly have innate knowledge of the Lord. For when we read Deuteronomy 6:1–25 carefully, we notice that God summarizes his commands by stating that the Israelites shall love the Lord with all their heart, soul, and strength (Deuteronomy 6:5). Next, God states that the commands shall be on their hearts (Deuteronomy 6:6). This seems to imply that because the Israelites are God’s people, his laws shall be on their hearts. There does not seem to be much difference between the fact that God’s laws shall be on their hearts (Deuteronomy 6:6) and that God will put his laws on their hearts and minds (Hebrews 8:10). So, it is hard to see how the people of the new covenant will know God any more intuitively than the people of the old covenant.

Response to counterargument:

There is more than one way to interpret Deuteronomy 6:6, and one must consider the context of that passage before one makes a judgment. When we look at Deuteronomy 6:1 we have Moses stating that the Lord taught him what he was to teach the people. And what is Moses to teach the people? He is to teach them all the ordinances and commandments that God wants them to obey. One of these commands is that Israel keep the words that are commanded upon their hearts. When understood in this light, we see that it is not that God shall put his laws on the people’s hearts but that God commands the people to put his laws on their hearts. Of course, we know from Hebrews 8:6–9 that the Israelites were not able to fulfil this task, which is why the new covenant is superior. For in the new covenant, it is God himself who will put his laws on the minds and hearts of the people, so that all God’s people will know him (Hebrews 8:10–11).

Possible weakness:

One of the potential weaknesses of this view is that the author of Hebrews does not clearly state that all aspects of the new covenant are initiated in one unified moment. In fact, there is a sense from Hebrews 8:13 that the old covenant is becoming obsolete and growing old, which seems to imply that the new covenant is not yet fully established. This may mean that aspects, such as that all will know the Lord, are set to happen in the future. Still, while it is possible that some aspects of the covenant are future-oriented, the context strongly suggests that an integral part of the new covenant is that because God will put his laws on people’s hearts and minds, all will know him.

Explanation:

The author of Hebrews wants his readers to know that the new covenant is far superior to the old. He helps them understand this by quoting from Jeremiah 31:31–34, which states that God will establish a new covenant, and all will know the Lord (Hebrews 8:11). Of course, there are many people today who do not believe in God, so this must mean that this aspect of the new covenant has not yet been initiated. We know from other parts of Scripture that when Jesus returns, every knee in heaven and on earth will bow, and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord (Philippians 2:10–11). This implies that there is an eschatological aspect to the new covenant, which means that everyone will know the Lord on the day of Jesus’ return.⁹

Counterargument:

First, it seems that the matter of everyone knowing at the eschaton that Jesus is Lord has to do with the nature of Jesus, which entails his supremacy over creation, not the nature of the covenant. In other words, whether God established a new covenant or not, all will know Jesus when he returns because his glory will be unmistakable.

Second, there is no indication from the author of Hebrews that he wants his readers to think in eschatological terms. On the contrary, he has been explaining that Jesus’ ministry is superior to that of the priests in the same way that the covenant he mediates is better than the old covenant (Hebrews 8:6). He then explains that one of the problems with the first covenant is that it was founded on promises that relied on the cooperation of the Israelites, but they were unable to comply (Hebrews 8:7–9). So, God established a new covenant, on better promises. And the promises are better because God would put his law on people’s minds and hearts so they would all know him. The author is highlighting the terms of the new covenant, which are founded on better promises and ushered in by Jesus’ ministry.

Possible weakness:

The problem with this view is that it overlooks the immediate and subsequent context in favour of a passage from the letter to the Philippians. While it is a fine exegetical strategy to look outside a passage for insight, this is normally done in conjunction with the meaning informed by the immediate context. In the case of Interpretation 2, the immediate context suggests that the reason the new covenant is better is that it is established on better promises (Hebrews 8:6). And the better promises seem to be that all will know God (Hebrews 8:11). In other words, the immediate context supports an interpretation that is at odds with the interpretation informed by the letter to the Philippians.